No Sony OLED Displays In 2004

Anonymous Howard writes "Designtechnica is reporting that Sony will not introduce any OLED displays in 2004 as previously anticipated. Sony was planning on producing 300,000 2-inch OLED panels per month for its portable devices such as DSCs (digital still cameras) and PDAs. Surprisingly, there have only been a handful of products out that use OLED displays; Samsung has a cell phone and MSI has an MP3 player, for example."

Comments

Pioneer

[Jhawkeye83]

I've had a pioneer CD Deck for my car for almost 2 years now that has OLED

Cost of OLEDs

[sethstorm]

The barrier to use of the OLED's is really the cost compared to conventional LCD's, and that also counts that OLED's have somewhat of a lessened life to them. Once they get this down, then you'll probably see more on the bandwagon for OLED (If they can be made to last at least 30 years, you can at least be competitive with conventional LCD with durability as well as price).

Re:Cost of OLEDs

[rokzy]

30 years seems a bit excessive, I'd imagine 20 years would be plenty, and 10 for cheaper items?

Re:Cost of OLEDs

[Anonymous Coward]

You're right about the lessened life compared to LCDs, but you're wrong about the production cost. OLEDs are cheaper to produce than LCDs, this is a known fact.

There is also many other advantages compared to LCDs; Organic light emitting diodes are self-emitting and don't require a backlight, they're brighter and require less power than LCD displays. They can also be read from a much wider viewing angle than LCDs, and they can even be made on plastic instead of glass.

I sure enjoy the OLED display on my mobile phone :)

- A lazy AC

Re:Cost of OLEDs

[mobby_6kl]

OLED displays can also support much higher (than LCD) refresh rates. Because there is no backlight, when a pixel is black it it really black so the contrast is also much higher.
30 years if of course too much, LCDs dont last that long and about 5 years should be good enough. Keep in mind that they do not die the day they turn 5 y.o., they just lose some of the brightness/contrast.

Re:Cost of OLEDs

[laing]

30 years is nuts. We don't even know if LCD or TFT displays will last that long since they haven't been around even half that time.

I think once they can produce OLED cells that last more than about 5 years on average, you'll see them go mainstream. Anything less than that could end up costing the manufacturer big in terms of warranty obligations.

Re:Cost of OLEDs

[NanoGator]

"I sure enjoy the OLED display on my mobile phone :)"

How noticable is the difference? I ask because I have a Motorola phone with a surprisingly bright and colorful screen. The only nitpick I have is that it's not a very wide angle screen. But since it's a cell phone..

Anyway, just curious what surprises you encountered with this screen.

Re:Cost of OLEDs

[pslam]

There is also many other advantages compared to LCDs; Organic light emitting diodes are self-emitting and don't require a backlight, they're brighter and require less power than LCD displays.

The OLED panels I've played with have all been far lower power than an LCD with the backlight turned on, but that's not a fair comparison for some products. For example, MP3 players can get away with turning the backlight off in many cases. An LCD with the backlight turned off takes almost no power. This "idle" state was hard to do with the OLEDs I've used because they were PWM driven, and below a certain brightness they'd get flickery. At the lowest acceptable brightness, they were using about 100 times the power an idle LCD did.

But OLED is still lower power for devices which are useless with the backlight turned off (like cameras, portable TV/DVD players etc). I wouldn't be surprised if next generation panels come down enough in power requirement that the difference isn't important.

Re:Cost of OLEDs

[Dr Zubi]

Sadly, this is not yet true. If all things were equal, then OLEDs are simpler to make, and would be cheaper. LCD manufacturers, however, have become astoundlingly good at making panels (the newest generation processes glass that's over 2m in diagonal!). OLEDs are not so mature, and manufacturers have to throw away lots of defective panels. Higher throughput, and better yield, means that for many years to come complicated LCDs will be cheaper than simpler OLEDs.

OLED

[Malluck]

Maybe it's due to the fact that they're still having problems making the lives of these displays as long as they would like. I know They had issues with the blue and green colors dieing over time.

The answer is probably in the article

[Rosco P. Coltrane]

the panels still have a shorter life span than TFT LCD panels

and my guess is, they rushed their mass production announcement before doing the QA for full PR effect, and the stress-tests showed the shorter life span to be quite dramatically shorter than expected.

Links links....where are the links!?

[ProfessionalCookie]

Such as MSI's MP3 Player and Samsung's Cell Phone.

Come on folks- this is the internet.

On a side note- I dare you to /. my .sig :)

Re:Links links....where are the links!?

[Anonymous Coward]

That link to the Samsung's phone is lying. The E715 (the North American version, carried by T-Mobile) only has a monochrome OLED display. It's only the E710 (the Vodaphone's European version) who has the 256 colors OLED display.

It is possible however to cross-flash a E710 with a E715 firmware to have a "E715" with the 256 colors LED display but that's becoming off-topic, I guess. :)

- A lazy AC

Re:Links links....where are the links!?

[beesquee]

My samsung e715 sees to only have the 16 color oled display, not 256k like the site says. Besides that, an interesting thing I did notice was that the digital clock on the external display is always illuminated andafter a few months of use it's already dimmer then less used graphic diplay under it. Eviendence of blue oled life problems? maybe.

Re:Links links....where are the links!?

[bigpat]

OLED that isn't vaporware:

http://www.emagin.com/svga3d.htm

Kodak uses OLED

[SuperRob]

All of Kodak's digital cameras are using OLED screens. They're probably the biggest shipper of OLED screens right now, but people always forget about them.

Well take a look at one of their screens, and you won't forget. They're GORGEOUS!

Re:Kodak uses OLED

[ffsnjb]

Not all of them, but some of the new ones. The LS 633 was the first to ship with an OLED. Sadly Kodak didn't sell it in the US. I've played with the 633 though, the screen is awesome. (I'm a camera tech at their US repair depot.)

Re:Kodak uses OLED

[SuperRob]

The LS633 most certainly was sold in the US. I should know ... I own it. :)

Re:Kodak uses OLED

[ffsnjb]

You're lucky, whatever retailer you got it from slipped up on that sale. Great camera though.

I just checked, the 633 is the only camera shipping/shipped with an OLED. All the other new cameras are using the FANTASTIC 1.8" or 2.2" LCD (quick comparison from the consumer website).

Re:Kodak uses OLED

[SuperRob]

You sure about that? A Kodak sales rep that I know said that every Kodak camera that has the "high-resolution indoor/outdoor display" is using OLED.

Re:Kodak uses OLED

[ffsnjb]

The DX6490 uses the 2.2" LCD (I just took mine apart to verify... stupid backlight cable.)

Re:Kodak uses OLED

[ffsnjb]

So maybe I'll get some mod points for this (makes up for maybe losing my job on Monday. :)

DX7630 specs

DX6490 specs

Note the descriptions on the specs page, no where does it mention OLED, but LCD is everywhere.

OLED - technology definition

[syrinje]

For those of you who RTFA and are still left mumbling "what the heck is an OLED.." here it is OLED is an Electroluminescent display technology. It is cnsidered one of the most promising emerging display technologies and exploits ultrathin films of organic compounds, either small molecules or polymers, which emit light (luminescence) when subjected to a voltage. These organic light-emitting diodes (OLEDs) produce bright, lightweight displays. A number of small independent firms in Europe and the US have been developing devices based on various luminescent molecules.

On a related note, in its 2004 MiniDV camcorders of the HC-XX series Sony claims to use a "Hybrid LCD display" which is claimed to perform significantly better than the regular LCD screens it renders obsolete (like the one in my 2003 MiniDV). I tried to find out what Hybrid meant and failed - what is the big secret I wonder...

Re:OLED - technology definition

[janbjurstrom]

I would also recommend an interesting (and lenghty) article on the subject in Scientific American I read a few months back:

Better Displays with Organic Films

It covers quite a few topics related to the technolog[y|ies], like the problems with the - currently - shorter life-span relative to LCD, etc.

Re:OLED - technology definition

[Dr Zubi]

Their "hybrid" display appears to be what's normally called "transflective". Each pixel has a transmissive area that allows a backlight to shine through, but also has a reflective area that modulates ambient light. So, it dim light it uses the *trans*missive part, and in bright light it uses the re*flective* part. The color in reflective mode is not so good, but better than a totally washed out backlit display.

As long as it isn't passed over...

[geschild]

... Because of vested interests.

OLED holds many promises because it is, as the name indicates, a LED type of display. In other words, you don't block/filter an underlying lightsource like with LCD-type screens. Every pixel itself emits light. This makes for better image quality at higher resolution and less power consumption plus, as a bonus, no vulnerable, ill-distrubuted central light-source.

Once (if?) the optimal solution is found to creating the seperate Organic colors reliably (and currently the biggest problem: durably) OLED should overtake all other techniques. Especially since some production techniques currently being pioneered do not have an inherent limitation to the substrate size (read: Mega sized displayes at Giga resolutions, ultraflat, high light-output and low power...).

I say should because LCD is currently the entrenched technique and I don't think all investments have been recoverd yet. The question then becomes: is the best (cheapest to produce) OLED solution being brought forward by a current player with LCD 'capital' to defend or an outsider? If the latter, OLED has a fighting chance, if the former, we'll have to see if several producers have competing designs to make OLED still take off. A lot of money has gone into those factories, and even if they are relatively easily converted to OLED, most companies don't jump for joy at the prospect of destroying existing investments for a newer technology. (Or any new investments for that matter ;D)

Recouping costs may hold OLED back more than any technological hurdle, I'm sorry to say.

best not forget...

[Animaether]

...because in a relatively short time, that gorgeous picture will have faded considerably.

They're making great advances in battling this problem, thankfully. In addition, Kodak does offer a full warranty (last I checked) on the digital display components.

too many LCD screens to sell

[Anonymous Coward]

there was an article on Bloomberg TV's asia market report the other day stating that there is a massive overproduction of LCD's and buyers are not buying so prices will fall as a result
good news for LCD buyers but bad for those of us waiting for mass produced OLED's
gotta buy the old stock before getting the new as usual and the less you buy the cheaper its gonna get for LCD's (forget plasma as it degrades dramatically in 3years)

Re:too many LCD screens to sell

[Anonymous Coward]

forget plasma as it degrades dramatically in 3years

As opposed to your beloved OLED, which goes out after only a year or two.

Re:too many LCD screens to sell

[Anonymous Coward]

Know what? ALL display tech sucks balls.

LG Phones

[halo1982]

Many of LG's cell phones use the same OLED display. The VX6000, VX5550 the LG 4600 (Telus) and a ton of them in Korean markets. Also Samsungs E715, the upcomming i550 use OLEDs for the outer displays. If you've seen an OLED display you know how attractive and sharp they look, its quite different from an LCD. They also have a very nice expanded viewing angle. Hopefully late this year and next year there will be phones with full color OLEDs as displays.

inside or out? Re:LG Phones

[johnpaul191]

i thought the VX6000 only used the OLED display for the outside display? visable when clamshell phone is closed, not a color display..... used as callerID, clock etc.....

i might be wrong, but i am pretty sure only the one is OLED. the shorter lifespan when compared to LCDs seems fine for a cell phone (if cost is ok) since people generally upgrade their cell phones much faster than their digital cameras of personal computers. i guess it also uses a good bit less power...... always nice for cell phones.

Re:inside or out? Re:LG Phones

[halo1982]

i thought the VX6000 only used the OLED display for the outside display? visable when clamshell phone is closed, not a color display..... used as callerID, clock etc.....

Yes you're right, its only on the outer LCDs (right now) the insides are TFTs or STNs or others (which I forgot to mention)

Vested Interest in not using OLED

[syslog]

Sony just sank a huge amount of cash in building a new LCD plant with Samsung. Why would they want to promote OLED? This was in the news all over the place in the last couple of days.

naeem

Re:Vested Interest in not using OLED

[NanoGator]

"Sony just sank a huge amount of cash in building a new LCD plant with Samsung. Why would they want to promote OLED? This was in the news all over the place in the last couple of days."

I'm not claiming to be an expert on this topic, but wasn't one of the big selling points of OLED technology that current LCD facilities could be upgraded to handle it relatively cheaply?

Not sure if I'm right on that or not, but Sony has demonstrated that they are interested in having a kick ass display. Go see their ultra-brite or whatever it is laptops they have at circuit city.

Re:Vested Interest in not using OLED

[aldoman]

So what? LCD will become the CRT-style display in the future - OLED will then take the place of what a LCD display was like when everyone had TFTs, a luxury. Then the prices will start coming down until they have replaced LCDs and the next wave of technology will start.

My god, I love capitalism.

One intresting side of this 'Fire and Motion' is that films look more and more outdated even quicker. Before, it took 5-10 years for your average film to look really outdated when it came to computers, now it's taking much less than 5. Look at the stupid films in the late 90s with their CRT displays ;).

Re:Vested Interest in not using OLED

[Anonymous Coward]

Look at the stupid films in the late 90s with their CRT displays ;).

My favorite example of future monitors is 2010, with the monitor (in Dr. Chandra's office, IIRC. It's been a while though) with a case the size of a modern-day 22" CRT, but with a visible area of about 12" and a resolution of maybe 40x40. :) Yeah, not much they could do about the resolution and screen size considering the tech at the time, but the huge fucking box around it? Whose idea was that?

A funny thing about late 90s movies and monitors: in a firefight, the LCDs never get hit. Every CRT in the room can get shot, but the LCDs go unscratched. Not surprising from a financial standpoint, since old, broken, or otherwise explosion-worthy CRTs are a dime a dozen and LCDs aren't, but it's still amusing to see the aftermath of an office fight scene with bits of computer shrapnel all over and one lone, unharmed LCD standing in the middle of it.

Re:Vested Interest in not using OLED

[WuphonsReach]

A funny thing about late 90s movies and monitors: in a firefight, the LCDs never get hit. Every CRT in the room can get shot, but the LCDs go unscratched. Not surprising from a financial standpoint, since old, broken, or otherwise explosion-worthy CRTs are a dime a dozen and LCDs aren't, but it's still amusing to see the aftermath of an office fight scene with bits of computer shrapnel all over and one lone, unharmed LCD standing in the middle of it.

Cute, that. I'll have to watch for that.

I'm thinking it's more because you can make the audience believe that CRTs like to go BOOM. (Do they? I don't think so, but I'm not sure.) At a minimum, CRTs make/allow a nice glass-shattering sound. LCDs just don't have that BOOM factor (can't trick the audience into believe that the plastic casing is as volatile as plastic explosive).

Re:Vested Interest in not using OLED

[aldoman]

It's actually true as well... if you ever see 'Walking Tall', it has the whole room TOTALLY shot to peices, apart from one LCD display. lollerskates or what!

Nomination for tin-foil hat of the day.

[SmallFurryCreature]

First of oled are not yet perfected, secondly all the companies are bitterly fighting with each other. Products being held back can only happen in relatively static conditions where all the players have a intrest in maintaining the current balance.

In electronics there is no such interest. The market for displaying things is huge. More and more things around the house have displays and who ever can make the cheapest/nicest can have a significant advantage.

But for now LCD is not yet dead. The screen size of oled is still low (sure it is going up but so is lcd). What you are suggesting is that the CRT was holding back the LCD. Or the tv industry the computer screen or the paper/dotmatrix industry the tv-screen industry.

Just because sony is having troubles doesn't mean oled isn't happening. As others have pointed out there are plenty of devices out there. I remember when camera's came with CRT viewers instead of the new fangled LCD. Nothing stopped the LCD except the tech and nothing will stop OLED except the tech. To many players who would love to get the holy grail of a cheap clear brilliant display.

Re:Nomination for tin-foil hat of the day.

[geschild]

Comparing the shift from CRT to LCD with the shift from LCD to OLED is nonsensical. CRT wasn't just an aged technology when LCD finally was easy enough to produce and reliable enough for greater use, it was positively ancient. It was time for something new. LCD was dramatically more different from CRT than LCD is from OLED in almost every aspect and so it had an easy 'in' in the market when it arrived.

Not so with OLED. OLED has many of the same characteristics of LCD, but it enhances on them. Not a radical change like LCD, but enough to make it very interesting as an evolutionary step up.

And therein lies the problem: LCD is barely out of its infancy and the new kid on the block is right on its heels. No time to recoup R&D or even just the cost of the production facilities!

I predict we will see lagging in the introduction of OLED. Perhaps not as bad as it would have been in a less competitive and global market than that of computer hardware today, but still.

If I'm correct, and in the coming years an even better new technique evolves, a higher evolutionary step on the ladder of display tech, then maybe LCD will be stretched to bridge the gap. If nothing new comes around in LCD-land, then OLED will certainly become big. Just not as fast as I hoped for when I first learned about it.

OLED has some tough competition

[zxflash]

with lcds falling 20% by year end it will be hard to compete... linkaroo: http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=tech nologyNews&storyID=5675145

Two inches?

[FirstTimeCaller]

Sure OLED's are showing up on phones and cameras... but what I'm really waiting for is the big stuff. I'm talking 42", 50" and 60"!

Plasma just isn't dropping in price fast enough and I'm concerned about it's limited life. Now if I can get an OLED flat panel display for say a couple hundred bucks... I'd even be willing to replace it every five to ten years at that price.

Re:Two inches?

[Anonymous Coward]

Plasma just isn't dropping in price fast enough and I'm concerned about it's limited life.

Um, OLEDs also have a limited life.

(Although hopefully the price would be low enough that you could indeed afford to replace it every few years. But such a hassle!)

roentgen

[sstory]

Whatever happened to the IBM Roentgen?

Re:roentgen

[WuphonsReach]

Whatever happened to the IBM Roentgen?

IBM article about the IBM Roentgen That was LCD technology, and the big deal at the time was they were first to get to 200dpi (previous record was the Monet at 157dpi). It's 2,560 x 2,048 pixels and 16.3" diagonally, dot pitch of around 0.127mm. At one point, it was supposed to end up in ThinkPad laptops. (Wish I had one for my laptop!)

However, I don't know that anyone sells it (can't find anything).

Other alternative:

ViewSonic Vp2290b 22.2 in LCD Monitor
3840 x 2400 Pixels - Dot Pitch 0.125 Mm - VGA, SXGA - Sku: vp2290b
Price Range: $5,699.00 to $7,046.04 at 10 stores

The ViewSonic VP2290B/VP2290B2 are 203ppi LCDs.

Re:roentgen

[WuphonsReach]

P.S.: IBM also makes a hi-res LCD display:

IBM 9503DG3 22.2 in LCD FLAT PANEL Monitor
3840 x 2400 Pixels - Sku: 9503DG3

Pricing is pretty much the same as the ViewSonic.

I've seen the Kodak OLED displays

[Anonymous Coward]

I was blown away. Incredible viewing angle, etc. (And yes, I saw the one which is OLED, not LCD)

However, since then I have seen the Sony DSC-T1 LCD display. And it looks at least as good as the Kodak display, plus it uses less power with the backlight on. And it is very visible in daylight with the backlight on or off!

I was convinced OLED was going to kill LCD, but now I'm not. This display is transflective, responsive and has a viewing angle that is over 160 degrees with only a tiny amount of color shifting, and it uses less power. It'll be amazing to see what happens when this technology comes to LCD TVs. It may leave no room for OLED, at least in the general marketplace.

Re:I've seen the Kodak OLED displays

[elecbrick]

The Sony DSC-T1 has an amazing LCD display. Even in bright sunlight it shows the colors with purity. This is especially important since it has no optical viewfinder. Highly recommended. I have owned it for a month now.

I only wish my laptops had as good a display in sunlight. Unlike most basement dewlling slashdotters, I perfer to code in briliant sunlight preferably overlooking a lake. Now where can I get a laptop with a display that is even somewhat legible in direct sunlight.

the OLEDs I've seen

[Anonymous Coward]

Use less power than a backlight LCD when less then 1/3rd of the pixels are on, but more when more than that are on.

Thus, in any video configuration, the OLED doesn't have a power advantage.

And as to the viewing angle, examine a Sony DSC-T1 camera, the viewing angle is essentially 180 degrees. There is no way OLED can have a wider viewing angle than that LCD display does.

I was an OLED believer. I'm not so sure now with the new LCDs I've seen.

As to OLEDs being cheaper to produce, that's not true. It may be true some day, but the limited production of OLEDs right now is keeping costs higher.

Sony?

[Ari_Haviv]

No OLED displays in 2004 not even in...Japan.

I've been looking for OLEDs for a prototype

[John Jorsett]

I've been hunting for OLED displays for a prototype that needs the low power and extended temperature range (LCD displays are useless below about 10-20 C, unless they have special fluid, which takes them down to around 0 C), and there isn't much out there. Pacific Display Devices is about the only supplier I found where an order for just a couple of displays wouldn't be met with gales of laughter or spittle. Anyone know of any others?

Re:In other news...

[Anonymous Coward]

I ah... I wouldn't call Sony "trusted."

Rephrasing of headline

[Xeth]

No news for Nerds?

Size and durability issues

[sandos_asagi]

OLEDs are getting pretty big right now though I admit they are only prototypes - http://www.eetimes.com/sys/news/showArticle.jhtml? articleID=20600073

The durability will be overcome, I remember when labs were first playing around with the idea of OLEDs and they only had green colours and lasted for only 100hrs. Now the red and green last well into 20000 hrs it is just the blue that is failing to get up to spec. Last I heard they were just about to achieve 10000 on the blue - almost getting up to a useful standard.

Currently the fullcolour screens are a lot thicker and power hungry than they will be eventually since atm three layers for each colour are used with a mask - even so these screens are a -lot- thinner than comparable LCD panels. Hit google image search for "OLED screens" and such (i'm in work atm and they filter google image search) you will find a lot of prototype screens in profile *awes at the thickness (should I say thinness)*

They will be the screen technology of the future. No doubt about it - especially when a flexible polymer can be used as the substrate (currently glass) and we can all have relatively cheap, huge and flexible screens. They are so efficient and bright they are being considered as a new lighting system for airport runways - embedded OLEDs would mark the be the current 'white lines'.

They will phase out LCDs starting with phones, I am sure it is in nokia's roadmap to start replacing LCD with OLED by 2005/2006 (cant find the source again though)

Anyway OLEDs are great!

*ramble ramble*